Payram

Suggest Payram File Structure

suggest_file_structure

Suggests a recommended backend folder/file structure for integrating Payram.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`root`	Yes
`notes`	No
`title`	Yes
`description`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed6 schema fields changedMay 25, 2026

addedOutput schema / definitions

Added value: +{
+  "__schema0": {
+    "additionalProperties": false,
+    "properties": {
+      "children": {
+        "items": {
+          "$ref": "#/definitions/__schema0"
+        },
+        "type": "array"
+      },
+      "description": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "path": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": {
+        "enum": [
+          "file",
+          "folder"
+        ],
+        "type": "string"
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [
+      "path",
+      "type"
+    ],
+    "type": "object"
+  }
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / root / $ref
```
Added value: +"#/definitions/__schema0"
```
removedOutput schema / properties / root / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```

removedOutput schema / properties / root / properties

Removed value: -{
-  "children": {
-    "items": {
-      "$ref": "#/properties/root"
-    },
-    "type": "array"
-  },
-  "description": {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  "path": {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  "type": {
-    "enum": [
-      "file",
-      "folder"
-    ],
-    "type": "string"
-  }
-}

removedOutput schema / properties / root / required
```
Removed value: -[
-  "path",
-  "type"
-]
```
removedOutput schema / properties / root / type
```
Removed value: -"object"
```

First observedFeb 18, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. The word 'suggests' implies a non-destructive, advisory behavior, but it does not explicitly state whether the tool creates files, returns a plan, or requires any project context. The behavior is partially transparent but lacks detail.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that conveys the tool's purpose without wasted words. It is appropriately concise for a tool with no parameters and a straightforward function.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's simplicity (no params, output schema present), the description covers the essential purpose. It could be slightly more complete by noting when to use it relative to scaffolding tools, but overall it is adequate for a suggestion-only tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has zero parameters and an empty input schema, so there is nothing to explain. Per the rubric, 0 parameters warrants a baseline of 4; the description appropriately adds no parameter-specific details.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's verb ('Suggests') and resource ('backend folder/file structure') for integrating Payram. The word 'suggests' distinguishes it from sibling tools like scaffold_payram_app, which implies actual creation, making the purpose unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives only a broad context ('for integrating Payram') but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as scaffold_payram_app or generate_setup_checklist. There are no exclusions or alternative recommendations.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Payram tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?